Comments by thecopartist

Comments by user: thecopartist

I am now retired but was one of those "shaded pencil artist of shadowy figures" for over 20 years. I was not against trying something new, if it would legitimately help in identifying a suspect but haven't found anything better than having an artist trained in interview techniques and able to use the information gathered to do a composite drawing. Granted, some composites that have been used across the country are a little strange but many departments will use an officer that can "draw" to do a composite, with little or no formal training.

Those that have had good,formal training in composite (forensic) art have a remarkable success rate in identifications.

The article, to me, seemed to be more advertisement for this guy's program (that isn't free, I'm sure) than giving the facts of forensic art. There have been many computer programs that have come and gone over the years and departments either stay with or go back to the pencil pusher.

What people have to understand is whether you use a computer or a pencil, the artist is limited to the recall abilities of the witness and some witnesses just aren't that good but you work with what you have. Believe me, I have done many a drawing from a witness that describes a suspect as a tall, short, skinny, fat man with no hair that turns out to be a female with black hair!

But it's the artist that gets blamed for a bad composite and not the witness we had to deal with. And no computer program is going to overcome that.

I'll stick to my pencil, thank you.

(Suggest removal) 3/4/08 at 10:07 a.m.